Safavi: Of Earls, Kings, and Dons Safavi 1

Of Earls, Kings, and Dons:

Examining the Interplay between Individual and Collective Interests in Families

Amir Safavi, Columbia University

The family is the foundational social unit in which humans participate. While a family

may have fewer constituents than other social units, such as nations, the family may be more

complex, as personal boundaries are blurred by intimacy. The needs and values of individual

family members come into conflict not only with each other, but also with the necessities and

conventions of the family as a collective entity. Authors and artists have regularly examined the

issues and values of their respective societies through the lens of the family dynamic and its

associated tensions. In turn, the topics addressed by these authors have served as a lens

through which audiences can better understand the complexity of the bonds that bind a family

together. William Shakespeare's King Lear and 's film adaptation of Mario

Puzo's are examples of such texts. Shakespeare's play addresses the dialectic

between the natural and the unnatural, with regard to human nature and political legitimacy.

Coppola's film sheds light on the immigrant experience in early twentieth century America, the

tensions between old world traditions and those of the new country, and the underground

Mafia culture of the United States. King Lear presents the Gloucester and Lear families, while

The Godfather tells the story of the family. An analysis of these families suggests that

personal interests cannot coexist with conflicting interests of the family. Competition between

these interests destabilizes a family, forcing its members to face adverse consequences; only

through individual compromise can the family survive.

Published by Digital Showcase @ University of Lynchburg, 2012 1 Agora, Vol. 21 [2012], Art. 8 Safavi 2

The Gloucester family is destroyed as a result of the conflict between the desires of

Edmund, the Earl's illegitimate son, and the will of the family, which is reinforced by the social

conventions of the time. Edmund was born out of wedlock, the second son of Earl Gloucester

and younger brother to Edgar. In a conversation with Kent, the Earl says, "I have a son, sir, by

order of law, some year elder than this who yet is no dearer in my account..." (1.1.18-19).

However much the Earl may love Edmund - as much as he loves Edgar, if not more - the Earl

cannot recognize his illegitimate son as a full member of the family. The notion of the family is

defined not only by blood ties, but also by the conventions of Britain in the Elizabethan era.

Thus, Edmund cannot be an heir to either his father's title or his power. At the same time,

Edmund's values are in stark contrast with the will of the family: "Thou, Nature, art my

goddess; to thy law / My services are bound. Wherefore should I / Stand in the plague of

custom, and permit / The custody on nations to deprive me / . ..why brand they us with base?"

(1.2.1-10). Legitimacy, either as a result of bloodlines or of primogeniture, holds no meaning for

Edmund. Edmund believes that power should be his because of natural right, by the value of his

own merits, and he rejects the notion that this power should be assigned by unnatural, human-

made conventions.

After setting his plot into motion and deceiving his brother and father, Edmund states,

"Let me, if not by birth, have lands by wit; / All with me's meet than I can fashion fit" (1.2.181­

182). Edmund's cause can be sympathetic, as it reveals not only a personal ambition but also a

need to be recognized for more than the value assigned to him by the world in which he lives. A

reader may sense a moment of irony when Edmund exclaims: "Now, gods, stand up for

bastards" (1.2.22), for Edmund circumvents social conventions and relies on his own initiative

https://digitalshowcase.lynchburg.edu/agora/vol21/iss2012/8 2 Safavi: Of Earls, Kings, and Dons Safavi 3

to elevate his situation. The issues lies with what he must do to realize his vision. The obstacles

Edmund must overcome are not just faceless social norms or impersonal authorities; he must

overcome the familial bonds he has with his brother and father, going as far as deceiving his

brother and leading his father to his death. His brutal and selfish actions instigate the

destruction of his family and, ultimately, his own destruction. Edmund does not seek

compromise between his own and his family's needs: Edmund wants his will to dominate.

Likewise, the Lear family is destroyed by the conflict between the needs of the

individual and the needs of the collective. In this case, there are multiple personal agendas

competing with each other, clouding any sense of a collective will or family unity. In the first

scene of the play, the King distributes his land and power among his three daughters: Goneril,

Regan and Cordelia: "...'tis our fast intent / To shake all cares and business from our age, /

Conferring them on younger strengths while we / Unburdened crawl toward death" (1.1.38-41).

Lear passes on the responsibilities of leadership to his daughters, yet he wishes to maintain the

respect and trappings of royalty, "[managing] those authorities / That he hath given away"

according to Goneril (1.3.17-18). In confronting Goneril and Regan over their decision to strip

him of his garrison of soldiers, Lear accuses them of showing disrespect to their father. Lear

appears to muddle a familial obligation with a regal obligation that the daughters are no longer

bound by since he has renounced the throne. In turn, Goneril and Regan begin to act only in

their own best interests, driven by greedy ambition. They ruthlessly allow their father to

wander into the storm and are driven to fight each other for personal gain, to the point where

Goneril poisons Regan in order to gain the passion and political allegiance of Edmund.

Published by Digital Showcase @ University of Lynchburg, 2012 3 Agora, Vol. 21 [2012], Art. 8 Safavi 4

Cordelia has no agenda per se, acting with honesty and serving as the model for purity

by the end of the play. Nevertheless, the reader can still question the validity of her actions.

While dividing his kingdom, King Lear challenges his daughters to declare which one of them

loves him the most. Goneril and Regan joust with each other, excessively professing their love

for their father. Cordelia, on the other hand, gives a sobering response: "Unhappy that I am, I

cannot heave / My heart into my mouth. I love your majesty / According to my bond, no more

nor less" (1.1.91-93). In turn, the King disowns Cordelia. Should she have told a falsehood,

feigning immeasurable love for her father, as a sign of respect for him and the conventions of

the family? Clearly, much of the blame for the fallout between Lear and Cordelia lies with the

King, for he values flattery from Goneril and Regan over true feelings from his youngest

daughter. Eventually, the King realizes that Cordelia was offering the most sincere love, and

Cordelia forgives him, strengthening the family, though much too late. Still, should Cordelia not

have compromised her integrity for a more civic cause?

Ultimately, the entire Lear family - the King, Cordelia, Goneril and Regan - is destroyed.

Each member of the family upholds his or her own personal values to the detriment of the

collective; even Cordelia, with the best of intentions, is a factor in the destabilization of the

family. The competition between their desires results in the Lear family lacking a sense of

collective interest or familial will. Such a thing would require compromise from each member of

the family: the King understanding that he cannot give power to his daughters and still

command regal authority, Goneril and Regan appeasing their father's wish despite the

inconvenience, and Cordelia making an exception to her truthful integrity and granting her

father a moment of flattery. Only with these compromises can a familial need be identified and

https://digitalshowcase.lynchburg.edu/agora/vol21/iss2012/8 4 Safavi: Of Earls, Kings, and Dons Safavi 5

strived for. Without it, there is no cohesion among the family members. Without it, there is no

family.

Likewise in The Godfather, the expression of personal desires nearly destroys the

Corleone family. However, compromise ultimately saves and restores the integrity of this

family. The Corleone family consists of both the family that the members belonged to by birth -

their blood relatives - as well as the one they belong to by choice - the Mafia. In a meeting with

Virgil Sollozzo, , the patriarch of the family, expresses the will of the family by

declining Sollozzo's offer to enter into the narcotics business. When Sollozzo assures Vito that

the Corleone investment would be protected by the Tattaglia family, Sonny, Vito's heir,

inadvertently reveals his thoughts: "Aw, you're telling me that the Tattaglias guarantee our

investment?" (The Godfather). With the slip, Sonny reveals that there is division within the

family in regard to the deal. Armed with this knowledge, Sollozzo plans to assassinate Vito in

order to negotiate with Sonny to reach an agreement over the narcotics business. With Vito in

the hospital, Sonny becomes the next Don Corleone and escalates a full scale war between the

Five Families of New York. His actions are driven by personal desires for revenge and are not

balanced by the needs of the family. Ultimately, Sonny puts the Corleone family on the brink of

collapse. The family is saved by the corrective actions of Michael and Vito.

In the opening wedding scene of the movie, Kay asks Michael to explain to her how Vito

assisted singer Johnny Fontaine with his career. Upon telling her the brutal story, Michael adds,

"That's my family, Kay. It's not me" (The Godfather). Indeed, Michael goes to great lengths to

distance himself from the Corleone crime organization and, as a result, his blood relatives. He

attends an Ivy League school and, without his father's approval, fights in the Second World

Published by Digital Showcase @ University of Lynchburg, 2012 5 Agora, Vol. 21 [2012], Art. 8 Safavi 6

War. Michael's values differ from those of the family, but are never in competition, as Michael

is not considered a member of the crime family. The assassination attempt on Vito's life puts

Michael in a position to re-examine his priorities. In a touching scene in the hospital, Michael

talks to Vito at his bedside, assuring his father of his safety: "Just lie here, Pop. I'll take care of

you now. I'm with you now. I'm with you" (The Godfather). He kisses his father's hand,

conveying his respect, and embarks on the path to becoming his father's replacement.

The next day, Michael volunteers to assassinate Sollozzo and Captain McCluskey. In

doing so, Michael sacrifices his personal values and integrity, is forced into exile, and leaves

Kay. After Sonny's brutal execution, the grief-stricken Vito is forced back into action. He denies

himself or his family any retribution for the death of his boy: "I want no inquiries made. I want

no acts of vengeance. I want you to arrange a meeting, with the heads of the . This

war stops now" (The Godfather). He forgoes an act of justice and personal retribution for the

overarching benefit of the family, both blood-relatives and the organization. Furthermore, he

agrees to the narcotics venture he firmly opposes, appeasing the heads of the Mafia

organizations throughout the country in order to save his family. When his personal interests

are in conflict with the interests of his family, Vito upholds his family and makes his own desires

secondary. After the peace, Michael returns home from exile and is installed as the new Don. In

order to stabilize the family, Michael must compromise his values; he can no longer distance

himself from the interests of his family. He tells Kay: "I mean in five years, the Corleone Family

is going to be completely legitimate. Trust me" (The Godfather). By installing Michael as the

new Don, Vito also sacrifices his long time dream of Michael blossoming into a legitimate,

respectable man in society:

https://digitalshowcase.lynchburg.edu/agora/vol21/iss2012/8 6 Safavi: Of Earls, Kings, and Dons Safavi 7

I never, I never wanted this for you. I worked my whole life - I don't apologize, to

take care of my family. And I refused to be a fool dancing on a string held by all

those big shots. I don't apologize; that's my life. But I thought that when it was

your time that - that you would be the one to hold the strings. This wasn't

enough time, Michael; it wasn't enough time. (The Godfather)

Only by sacrificing personal desires can Michael and Vito maintain the Corleone family, both the

blood-relations and the crime organization, and save it from destruction.

King Lear and The Godfather portray families in two completely different worlds.

Though the dynamics and participants in the Gloucester, Lear, and Corleone families are

unique, it is clear that the expression of personal desires, without consideration for the desires

of others or the needs of the collective, destabilizes each family and puts everyone at risk. One

could argue that all families - happy or unhappy - resemble one another in this way, as they

deal with the tension between the individual and the family group. By extension, the same

could be said about society at large as though the family is a microcosm for the greater human

collective. This tension is amplified as the world becomes increasingly open to individualism

and personal liberties of sexuality, gender, race, and faith, while also moving toward the model

of majority will in a democratic society. This reality should promote the search for the best

state of compromise between the wants and needs of an individual and a collective. The

difficulty arises from defining the limits for compromise, the point at which it goes against the

very essence of an individual's identity to concede his or her desires. The struggle between the

needs of the many and the needs of the few will always remain a hallmark of humanity.

Published by Digital Showcase @ University of Lynchburg, 2012 7 Agora, Vol. 21 [2012], Art. 8 Safavi 8

Works Cited

The Godfather. Dir. Francis Ford Coppola. Paramount Pictures, 1972. Film.

Shakespeare, William, and Stephen Orgel. King Lear. New York, NY: Penguin, 1999.

Print.

https://digitalshowcase.lynchburg.edu/agora/vol21/iss2012/8 8